Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #10

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
If she's not in the river and we look at other possibilities, then in what scenario did her phone and the dog lead end up on the bench? Staged as a decoy? then why not leave them at the river edge?
An abduction at the bench with distances to the exits and no-doubt a barking dog sounds unlikely. I suppose its possible it happened somewhere else nearer an exit and another walker (who has remained anonymous for whatever reason), innocently found the items and moved them to the bench to be found.
 
I don't understand why people are trying to shut this down.

Police have said it's a line of enquiry they are looking into?
It's a valid topic.

The hundreds of cars they are referring to is most likely the drivers that used the main road,
which they have written letters to.

IMO
am not trying to ' shut it down' ( I posted several pix of 'a red vehicle' on Hall Lane yesterday, parked up on the other side of the old stone barn )
 
Yes it is only about 80 m - 100m bench and although not directly accessible (bushes separate it from the field) those bushes are probably free of leaves at this time of year and she might have followed her dog to the edge there. If the police have not searched it they probably have information not released as it seems obvious to search it

Yes. It would be pretty much impossible to get someone over that unless they were cooperating with you.
I'm staggered. It looks very easy to me . Is it more plausible to fall in a river from a field drown in 2 ft water and float to the irish sea?
 
This is the timeline.
NOTHING has changed from the outset.

Timeline



8.26am- Nicola leaves her home address with her children

8.40am- Nicola drops the children off at school and has a brief conversation with another parent.

8.43am – Nicola walked along the path by the River Wyre towards the gate/bench into the lower field, having dropped her children off at school

8:47am (approximately) - A dog-walker – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her walking around the lower field with her dog. Their two dogs interacted briefly before the witness left the field via the river path

8.53am – She sent an email to her boss

8.59 am- She sent message to a friend

9.01am – She logged into a Teams call

9.10am (approximately) – A witness – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her on the upper field walking her dog, Willow. Work is ongoing today to establish exactly what time this was.


9.20- Her phone was back in the area of the bench

9.30am – The Teams call ended but Nicola stayed logged on

9.33am (approximately) – Nicola’s mobile phone and Willow were found at a bench by the river by another dog-walker.

Can they not get that witness time from the phone?
 
This is the timeline.
NOTHING has changed from the outset.

Timeline



8.26am- Nicola leaves her home address with her children

8.40am- Nicola drops the children off at school and has a brief conversation with another parent.

8.43am – Nicola walked along the path by the River Wyre towards the gate/bench into the lower field, having dropped her children off at school

8:47am (approximately) - A dog-walker – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her walking around the lower field with her dog. Their two dogs interacted briefly before the witness left the field via the river path

8.53am – She sent an email to her boss

8.59 am- She sent message to a friend

9.01am – She logged into a Teams call

9.10am (approximately) – A witness – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her on the upper field walking her dog, Willow. Work is ongoing today to establish exactly what time this was.

9.20- Her phone was back in the area of the bench

9.30am – The Teams call ended but Nicola stayed logged on

9.33am (approximately) – Nicola’s mobile phone and Willow were found at a bench by the river by another dog-walker.


The entry at 9.10 has said "work is ongoing today to establish exactly what time this was" for many many days now !
 
Yes. It would be pretty much impossible to get someone over that unless they were cooperating with you.
Looking at photos from google maps it does look like there is a fence separating the Rowanwater site with lodges from the field which is mainly a wire fence along the field and near the river is a lap fence. I agree it would be virtually very hard to get across the lap fence but surely her crossing the wire fence area (maybe chasing dog) should not be discounted particularly as the obvious areas have been searched and we think nothing found
 
I've I've said from that start the dog is the key to this. It was off its lead which meant it could run anywhere. Nicola was on a call so didn't have her full attention on the dog.
Yes. IMO, the dog AND the phone. The phone because it is supposed to have remained on the bench from 9:20, connected to Teams. The dog because it’s what she was responsible for. As I’ve said previously it suggests an immediate intervention by NB, panic and leaving/ignoring phone, to tend to the dog in the immediate vicinity. Most other scenarios would involve picking up, or disturbing/grabbing, the phone. Springers love water, hedgerows, small animals and fowl.
 
yes thanks for adding the extra - I'd missed the meaning ( so she was saying it to the girls)

btw
I saw the interview where Emma was asked if she had faith in the police and at first she said she didn't want to comment, then hesitates before saying some complimentary things. It's somewhere on this thread

Anyway, imo, they both believe she is alive, just from reading Paul Ansell's comments same day Nicola Bulley's partner says his family are going through 'hell'

^ That's my impression too. And since they know her best, perhaps they have good reasons for continuing to believe she's out there somewhere? We're at the mercy of not knowing what they know and what equally likely the investigating team knows.

I would love to think her family and close friends have solid grounds for their stance (if it is their stance, of course, and not just our impression of their stance based on what they say publicly) in that their belief is one based on substance rather than blind hope.

I know, blind hope on my part, probably. Sadly.
 
Last edited:
From todays Lancashire Police Timeline

Timeline




8.26am- Nicola leaves her home address with her children

8.40am- Nicola drops the children off at school and has a brief conversation with another parent.

8.43am – Nicola walked along the path by the River Wyre towards the gate/bench into the lower field, having dropped her children off at school

8:47am (approximately) - A dog-walker – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her walking around the lower field with her dog. Their two dogs interacted briefly before the witness left the field via the river path

8.53am – She sent an email to her boss

8.59 am- She sent message to a friend

9.01am – She logged into a Teams call

9.10am (approximately) – A witness – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her on the upper field walking her dog, Willow. Work is ongoing today to establish exactly what time this was.

9.20- Her phone was back in the area of the bench

9.30am – The Teams call ended but Nicola stayed logged on

9.33am (approximately) – Nicola’s mobile phone and Willow were found at a bench by the river by another dog-walker.

Why has the 9.33am entry become another dog walker when it has been stated multiple times (including press interviews) that one female person was simply walking and a second person (male) had a dog?
Is it any wonder people are questioning everything about this case when even the Police are for some reason not being crystal clear in an official timeline?
This is exactly what I was saying a few days ago, MOO the timeline is dependent on a witness who can't be sure of the time that saw someone with the Willow that matched NB's description (but from far enough away that I don't believe it can be a positive id) and the person who "found the phone and Willow" who didn't actually report it till 10.45? Which means there is a period between 8.59 and 10.45 where she isn't positively accounted for.
Now look I don't think shes in the river, but even if she is, we only know the movements of the dog and the phone.
Hypothesis: Someone found the phone on the path and moved it to the bench at 9.20am.
Hypothesis: The dog was loose in the field from around 9am, and the witness saw the dog, and a women walking and assumed it was a woman walking a dog, as oppose to a dog running loose and an unconnected *edited person.
 
Last edited:
My dogs wouldn't care about being tied up particularly, but hate being alone and would cry, bark, whimper for the whole time until they were reunited with ideally someone in their (pack) family but (if they distracted them) anyone.
 
Usually not, IIRC. There is a book called The Perfect Storm which goes into some detail about what happens when someone drowns. I don't recall the percentages, but that author said that most who drown do so with no water in their lungs.

I said a few threads back, and others have said likewise, that the only way you could use mannequins would be in a sort of Monte Carlo way. Monte Carlo is a just a financial modelling term that means "simulate it a very large number of times and see what happens most often". The trouble is that doing so would take time, the more time elapses the more outcomes there are, and by the time you've got your Monte Carlo answer, all it tells you is where she was however long ago you did the exercise. If you somehow did it in real time to see where she gets to in two weeks, by the time you've established this two more weeks have passed so all you know is where she probably was two weeks ago.

The comparison with plastic ducks isn't valid IMO. Yes they end up all over place, but they're hardly in the water at all, they're on it rather than submerged, they can't go aground, most of them is exposed to wind, rain etc which are going to have a greater effect on a small thing than on a body, and in that photo, some will shelter others from the wind. But for practicality reasons I don't think it can work.
I didn't know what Monte Carlo was - but it couldn't help at all, because knowing what happens most often is no use in ascertaining what happened in one individual instance.
 
I've I've said from that start the dog is the key to this. It was off its lead which meant it could run anywhere. Nicola was on a call so didn't have her full attention on the dog.
Nicola was on a conference call but not participating it seems, her video was turned off and she was on mute. I read she often used speakerphone when on calls.

I had wondered about the og being off leash and harness and apparently this was perfectly normal for them on this regular walk.
I also found a piece from dog behaviourists on the dog's behaviour and breed characteristics. This type of dog is a classed as a working dog and highly intelligent, obviously training also enters into behaviour. However I think she would be very attentive to Nicola.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
103
Guests online
1,663
Total visitors
1,766

Forum statistics

Threads
606,800
Messages
18,211,306
Members
233,965
Latest member
tammyb1025
Back
Top